ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. v. Wright, 3:19-CV-00311-SLG. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Alaska
Number: infdco20191218a94
Visitors: 20
Filed: Dec. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2019
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING CONOCOPHILLIPS TO FILE A PUBLIC VERSION OF ITS EX PARTE MOTION SHARON L. GLEASON , District Judge . On December 12, 2019, Plaintiff ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. ("ConocoPhillips") filed an ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. 1 The Court granted the temporary restraining order on December 13, 2019. 2 Courts "recognize[] a `general right to inspect and copy public records, including judicial records and documents . . . This right is
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING CONOCOPHILLIPS TO FILE A PUBLIC VERSION OF ITS EX PARTE MOTION SHARON L. GLEASON , District Judge . On December 12, 2019, Plaintiff ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. ("ConocoPhillips") filed an ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. 1 The Court granted the temporary restraining order on December 13, 2019. 2 Courts "recognize[] a `general right to inspect and copy public records, including judicial records and documents . . . This right is ..
More
ORDER DIRECTING CONOCOPHILLIPS TO FILE A PUBLIC VERSION OF ITS EX PARTE MOTION
SHARON L. GLEASON, District Judge.
On December 12, 2019, Plaintiff ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. ("ConocoPhillips") filed an ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.1 The Court granted the temporary restraining order on December 13, 2019.2
Courts "recognize[] a `general right to inspect and copy public records, including judicial records and documents . . . This right is justified by the interest of citizens in `keeping a watching eye on the workings of public agencies.'"3 Accordingly, ConocoPhillips shall file with this Court for public record a version of its motion at Docket 3 and accompanying papers no later than December 19, 2019.4 In the alternative, ConocoPhillips shall file a notice, on or before that same date, explaining why some or all of its motion papers should not be in the public record.
FootNotes
1. Docket 3.
2. Docket 9.
3. Kamakana v. City & Cty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978)).
4. ConocoPhillips shall include public versions of the documents at Docket Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 7. ConocoPhillips may redact any sensitive information according to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2.
Source: Leagle
